Skip to content
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Twitter)   Because you didn't think you needed it, but here's the play-by-play of the Apple v. Epic court battle. Complete with lawyers trying to dryly explain Fortnite and third-person shooters   (twitter.com) divider line
    More: Amusing, shot  
•       •       •

647 clicks; posted to Fandom » on 10 May 2021 at 3:20 PM (5 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



35 Comments     (+0 »)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2021-05-10 1:33:27 PM  
Original Tweet:

 
2021-05-10 1:35:57 PM  
This exchange is great

Fark user imageView Full Size


It's like trying to explain video games to your parents when you were 12
 
2021-05-10 2:11:40 PM  
Now I want a game where you are a mad scientist on trial for war crimes-and the entire playable part of the game is the player controlling people through the war crimes. Sort of a Lemmings meets Far Cry thing, with the cut-scenes being the trial.
 
2021-05-10 2:21:53 PM  
 
2021-05-10 3:23:07 PM  
It's a modern day version of "Rosenkrantz & Guildenstern Are Dead"

Absolutely surreal
 
2021-05-10 3:27:31 PM  
Twitter... For a supposedly grown ass man covering a hugely important court case.

Yes, I can see how Twitter seems good for note taking and like brief box score style reporting, but I hate it.

And I would much rather see this on a news blotter or news blog building out over time. Also, to be curated.
 
2021-05-10 3:54:14 PM  
Lawyer: And what do you call this?
Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2021-05-10 4:56:18 PM  
Apple lawyer: If someone were to say Fortnite Creative is "Barbie Fashion Designer for the Fortnite Universe, that person would be incorrect, true?"


For a brief instant, I read that as Barbie Fusion Designer and was intrigued.
 
2021-05-10 6:52:45 PM  
If you seriously think the micro-transactions lawsuit is important to your day to day life log the fark off and go outside
 
2021-05-10 6:53:33 PM  
Fark user imageView Full Size


"While enjoying a gourmet breakfast in my very large mansion, a colleague of mine informed me about something called a 'third person shooter,' which is apparently what poor people do to amuse themselves."
 
2021-05-10 6:58:05 PM  

red5ish: Lawyer: And what do you call this?
[Fark user image image 220x212]


Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2021-05-10 6:58:42 PM  
 
2021-05-10 7:05:16 PM  

moothemagiccow: If you seriously think the micro-transactions lawsuit is important to your day to day life log the fark off and go outside


On a micro level it isn't.  On a macro level it has the possibility of drastically changing the app landscape which is a big deal for anyone that does app development.  Forcing Apple to allow alternative app loading options would be a game changer.
 
2021-05-10 7:53:35 PM  

mjbok: moothemagiccow: If you seriously think the micro-transactions lawsuit is important to your day to day life log the fark off and go outside

On a micro level it isn't.  On a macro level it has the possibility of drastically changing the app landscape which is a big deal for anyone that does app development.  Forcing Apple to allow alternative app loading options would be a game changer.


And unnecessary outside of empowering Epic/Tencent to further profit from their storefront on Apple devices.  Tencent has a slew of mobile apps - you can bet they'd all suddenly be offered exclusively from the Epic Store.
 
2021-05-10 8:30:51 PM  
Wait until they try to explain "tea-bagging".
 
2021-05-10 9:40:02 PM  
If I understand it correctly, the plaintiff asserts that the defendant has spoiled his nice new rattle.
 
2021-05-10 10:23:22 PM  

moothemagiccow: If you seriously think the micro-transactions lawsuit is important to your day to day life log the fark off and go outside


You know what site you posted this on, right? Why would you imagine that anyone here is reading this shiat out of Serious Important Concern.

/I do have a little money riding on the outcome though
 
2021-05-10 10:57:37 PM  

Monkeyfark Ridiculous: moothemagiccow: If you seriously think the micro-transactions lawsuit is important to your day to day life log the fark off and go outside

You know what site you posted this on, right? Why would you imagine that anyone here is reading this shiat out of Serious Important Concern.

/I do have a little money riding on the outcome though


I'm very interested in the results myself. Depending on how this goes, there could be a hell of a status quo crash. It could also doom us to walled gardens forever. I really want to see Apple forced to allow other App Stores, I wouldn't mind banning of exclusivity, I think that decision applying to consoles as well would be intriguing.

It could also be a fairly meaningless thing. Given this whole explaining it video games so far today, I can tell you I have no interest in the play by play. It's pretty appalling lawyers, jurors, and judges with involvement wouldn't be forced to have familiarity before being admitted in the courthouse. I hate terrible analogies and awful precedent being set based on technical ineptitude.
 
2021-05-10 11:12:32 PM  

Quantumbunny: Monkeyfark Ridiculous: moothemagiccow: If you seriously think the micro-transactions lawsuit is important to your day to day life log the fark off and go outside

You know what site you posted this on, right? Why would you imagine that anyone here is reading this shiat out of Serious Important Concern.

/I do have a little money riding on the outcome though

I'm very interested in the results myself. Depending on how this goes, there could be a hell of a status quo crash. It could also doom us to walled gardens forever. I really want to see Apple forced to allow other App Stores, I wouldn't mind banning of exclusivity, I think that decision applying to consoles as well would be intriguing.

It could also be a fairly meaningless thing. Given this whole explaining it video games so far today, I can tell you I have no interest in the play by play. It's pretty appalling lawyers, jurors, and judges with involvement wouldn't be forced to have familiarity before being admitted in the courthouse. I hate terrible analogies and awful precedent being set based on technical ineptitude.


If Apple loses their stock will crash.
 
2021-05-11 12:23:34 AM  

Quantumbunny: Monkeyfark Ridiculous: moothemagiccow: If you seriously think the micro-transactions lawsuit is important to your day to day life log the fark off and go outside

You know what site you posted this on, right? Why would you imagine that anyone here is reading this shiat out of Serious Important Concern.

/I do have a little money riding on the outcome though

I'm very interested in the results myself. Depending on how this goes, there could be a hell of a status quo crash. It could also doom us to walled gardens forever. I really want to see Apple forced to allow other App Stores, I wouldn't mind banning of exclusivity, I think that decision applying to consoles as well would be intriguing.

It could also be a fairly meaningless thing. Given this whole explaining it video games so far today, I can tell you I have no interest in the play by play. It's pretty appalling lawyers, jurors, and judges with involvement wouldn't be forced to have familiarity before being admitted in the courthouse. I hate terrible analogies and awful precedent being set based on technical ineptitude.


I feel like the walled garden is a selling point for Apple-- they cater to users who want more curation, and users who think of that as "doom" are free to use a different OS (as the vast majority in fact do).

As for the courtroom silliness, it's probably less about technical knowledge and more about not wanting to find out later that you neglected to establish some key point about how things work because you thought it was obvious. Also, if you get a chance to say "naked banana" in federal court, you do it.
 
2021-05-11 12:39:28 AM  

Shryke: Quantumbunny: Monkeyfark Ridiculous: moothemagiccow: If you seriously think the micro-transactions lawsuit is important to your day to day life log the fark off and go outside

You know what site you posted this on, right? Why would you imagine that anyone here is reading this shiat out of Serious Important Concern.

/I do have a little money riding on the outcome though

I'm very interested in the results myself. Depending on how this goes, there could be a hell of a status quo crash. It could also doom us to walled gardens forever. I really want to see Apple forced to allow other App Stores, I wouldn't mind banning of exclusivity, I think that decision applying to consoles as well would be intriguing.

It could also be a fairly meaningless thing. Given this whole explaining it video games so far today, I can tell you I have no interest in the play by play. It's pretty appalling lawyers, jurors, and judges with involvement wouldn't be forced to have familiarity before being admitted in the courthouse. I hate terrible analogies and awful precedent being set based on technical ineptitude.

If Apple loses their stock will crash.


So it will be another great time to buy some AAPL shares.
 
2021-05-11 4:55:37 AM  
memegenerator.netView Full Size
 
2021-05-11 5:26:23 AM  
It's 2021.  Anyone who needs FPS explained is too ignorant for legal jobs or jury duty.
 
2021-05-11 6:28:08 AM  

leeksfromchichis: It's 2021.  Anyone who needs FPS explained is too ignorant for legal jobs or jury duty.


Meh.  Gaming terminology generally isn't really a requirement to handle corporate lawsuits, not any more than sport statistics or what the latest big name TikTok-er posted last night.
 
2021-05-11 7:49:17 AM  
They should have random 13 year olds in the back screaming about the judge's mother the whole time
 
2021-05-11 8:49:22 AM  

leeksfromchichis: It's 2021.  Anyone who needs FPS explained is too ignorant for legal jobs or jury duty.


That's an incorrect statement.
Our entire legal system is specifically designed to operate without special expertise.
That's why experts are brought in from outside the legal system to provide expert testimony in legal cases.
Indeed, knowing a great deal about a subject that is intrinsic to a legal case will usually get you disqualified as a juror.
 
2021-05-11 9:12:26 AM  

jso2897: leeksfromchichis: It's 2021.  Anyone who needs FPS explained is too ignorant for legal jobs or jury duty.

That's an incorrect statement.
Our entire legal system is specifically designed to operate without special expertise.
That's why experts are brought in from outside the legal system to provide expert testimony in legal cases.
Indeed, knowing a great deal about a subject that is intrinsic to a legal case will usually get you disqualified as a juror.


You don't need to be an expert, but if you are completely and utterly oblivious to a subject that is such a part of daily life, I don't think you should be eligible to be in the jury pool, as you are not a peer of anyone involved or anyone it effects. Existence is not enough.

General familiarity with the concept of murder would be a good idea for someone on a murder case. The concept of value and ownership is something we expect people to be generally familiar with as they are members of society, so it's kind of pre-requisite in theft. You don't need to know how to commit specific kinds of theft, or the tools required, but you can't claim it's a good idea to have people with no familiarity at all.

I have been disqualified from being on a jury for understanding the constitution and Colorado law. That's bullshiat, right there.

And someone explaining a farking Banana mascot isn't an expert on Fortnite, it's someone who's seen the game one time. I don't think people need familiar with that specific game, or those specific characters to understand Fortnite is a large cultural phenomenon and makes Epic an asston of money. That's probably enough right there. Knowing that video games exist, and bring familiar with the difference between a video and a video game, and what a banana is... Seems like too low a bar not to have it. Knowing the industry definition of FPS isn't necessary in advance. I don't expect they'd need to understand the monetization ecosystem if Apple and Epic and v-Bucks up front, but that's the kind of stuff an expert should be brought in to explain, because all of that is very relevant especially in detail at a level I wouldn't expect the general public to know.
 
2021-05-11 9:25:34 AM  

Quantumbunny: jso2897: leeksfromchichis: It's 2021.  Anyone who needs FPS explained is too ignorant for legal jobs or jury duty.

That's an incorrect statement.
Our entire legal system is specifically designed to operate without special expertise.
That's why experts are brought in from outside the legal system to provide expert testimony in legal cases.
Indeed, knowing a great deal about a subject that is intrinsic to a legal case will usually get you disqualified as a juror.

You don't need to be an expert, but if you are completely and utterly oblivious to a subject that is such a part of daily life, I don't think you should be eligible to be in the jury pool, as you are not a peer of anyone involved or anyone it effects. Existence is not enough.

General familiarity with the concept of murder would be a good idea for someone on a murder case. The concept of value and ownership is something we expect people to be generally familiar with as they are members of society, so it's kind of pre-requisite in theft. You don't need to know how to commit specific kinds of theft, or the tools required, but you can't claim it's a good idea to have people with no familiarity at all.

I have been disqualified from being on a jury for understanding the constitution and Colorado law. That's bullshiat, right there.

And someone explaining a farking Banana mascot isn't an expert on Fortnite, it's someone who's seen the game one time. I don't think people need familiar with that specific game, or those specific characters to understand Fortnite is a large cultural phenomenon and makes Epic an asston of money. That's probably enough right there. Knowing that video games exist, and bring familiar with the difference between a video and a video game, and what a banana is... Seems like too low a bar not to have it. Knowing the industry definition of FPS isn't necessary in advance. I don't expect they'd need to understand the monetization ecosystem if Apple and Epic and v-Bucks up front, but that's the kind of stuff an expert should be brought in to explain, because all of that is very relevant especially in detail at a level I wouldn't expect the general public to know.


Such a part of daily life?

Not really.
 
2021-05-11 9:33:28 AM  

freakdiablo: leeksfromchichis: It's 2021.  Anyone who needs FPS explained is too ignorant for legal jobs or jury duty.

Meh.  Gaming terminology generally isn't really a requirement to handle corporate lawsuits, not any more than sport statistics or what the latest big name TikTok-er posted last night.


FPS isn't gaming terminology so much as a universal initialism that spans generations and languages.   If you don't know, you don't know enough to be allowed to serve in this trial even though corporate law is allegedly the important part.  It's like not knowing why we don't put dynamite in our butts.  not the most important knowledge, but someone lacking is dangerously below average.
 
2021-05-11 10:22:07 AM  

leeksfromchichis: freakdiablo: leeksfromchichis: It's 2021.  Anyone who needs FPS explained is too ignorant for legal jobs or jury duty.

Meh.  Gaming terminology generally isn't really a requirement to handle corporate lawsuits, not any more than sport statistics or what the latest big name TikTok-er posted last night.

FPS isn't gaming terminology so much as a universal initialism that spans generations and languages.   If you don't know, you don't know enough to be allowed to serve in this trial even though corporate law is allegedly the important part.  It's like not knowing why we don't put dynamite in our butts.  not the most important knowledge, but someone lacking is dangerously below average.


What does fps stand for?  Frames per second? Feet per second?  Just because someone doesn't know your particular application of an acronym doesn't speak ill of their skills in a particular field.  Just means they don't care about how it relates to you.
 
2021-05-11 11:04:58 AM  

Quantumbunny: You don't need to be an expert, but if you are completely and utterly oblivious to a subject that is such a part of daily life, I don't think you should be eligible to be in the jury pool, as you are not a peer of anyone involved or anyone it effects.


The rules of our legal system disagree with you. You're entitled to your opinion, of course, but, respectfully - it's meaningless.
Jurors are called to base their decisions on the testimony they hear and the evidence they see, and to disregard any prior knowledge they might have - indeed, the less the, better.
Same applies to judges, who are sworn to disregard their personal views, and who are expected to recuse themselves when they cannot.
 
2021-05-11 11:09:47 AM  

freakdiablo: leeksfromchichis: freakdiablo: leeksfromchichis: It's 2021.  Anyone who needs FPS explained is too ignorant for legal jobs or jury duty.

Meh.  Gaming terminology generally isn't really a requirement to handle corporate lawsuits, not any more than sport statistics or what the latest big name TikTok-er posted last night.

FPS isn't gaming terminology so much as a universal initialism that spans generations and languages.   If you don't know, you don't know enough to be allowed to serve in this trial even though corporate law is allegedly the important part.  It's like not knowing why we don't put dynamite in our butts.  not the most important knowledge, but someone lacking is dangerously below average.

What does fps stand for?  Frames per second? Feet per second?  Just because someone doesn't know your particular application of an acronym doesn't speak ill of their skills in a particular field.  Just means they don't care about how it relates to you.


Besides - the whole concept that a juror is supposed to have prior knowledge of a matter under judgement is faulty. They are not, and are supposed to disregard it if they do.
This has been carefully explained to anyone who has ever sat on a jury.
 
2021-05-11 2:05:58 PM  

jso2897: freakdiablo: leeksfromchichis: freakdiablo: leeksfromchichis: It's 2021.  Anyone who needs FPS explained is too ignorant for legal jobs or jury duty.

Meh.  Gaming terminology generally isn't really a requirement to handle corporate lawsuits, not any more than sport statistics or what the latest big name TikTok-er posted last night.

FPS isn't gaming terminology so much as a universal initialism that spans generations and languages.   If you don't know, you don't know enough to be allowed to serve in this trial even though corporate law is allegedly the important part.  It's like not knowing why we don't put dynamite in our butts.  not the most important knowledge, but someone lacking is dangerously below average.

What does fps stand for?  Frames per second? Feet per second?  Just because someone doesn't know your particular application of an acronym doesn't speak ill of their skills in a particular field.  Just means they don't care about how it relates to you.

Besides - the whole concept that a juror is supposed to have prior knowledge of a matter under judgement is faulty. They are not, and are supposed to disregard it if they do.
This has been carefully explained to anyone who has ever sat on a jury.


That's bias that's supposed to avoided, not understanding of concepts. They want to make sure you can divest yourself from news versions of stories about this case. Things like Nancy Grace "facts" or things reported in newspapers or online message boards or personal ties like religious baggage, personal ties or history in regards to the defendant or the plantiff.

Not that general facts like taking a life is murder. Or understanding of technology or basic understanding of the concept of what a phone does it how email works. They don't expect or want to have to explain electricity or LCD screens unless it's at level past the common understanding because it's relevant to the case.

Trying to explain a video game and what is and it seems pretty irrelevant to this as non-games are on app stores. This argument is about the store and in app purchases.

I would want to know the context behind this, but it seems like they are trying to explain the difference between a store, a launcher, loading screens, menus, cutscenes, gameplay, and in game purchases. One or two of those seems pretty relevant, but I'd like to hear how the banana fits in this story.
 
2021-05-11 3:33:00 PM  

freakdiablo: leeksfromchichis: freakdiablo: leeksfromchichis: It's 2021.  Anyone who needs FPS explained is too ignorant for legal jobs or jury duty.

Meh.  Gaming terminology generally isn't really a requirement to handle corporate lawsuits, not any more than sport statistics or what the latest big name TikTok-er posted last night.

FPS isn't gaming terminology so much as a universal initialism that spans generations and languages.   If you don't know, you don't know enough to be allowed to serve in this trial even though corporate law is allegedly the important part.  It's like not knowing why we don't put dynamite in our butts.  not the most important knowledge, but someone lacking is dangerously below average.

What does fps stand for?  Frames per second? Feet per second?  Just because someone doesn't know your particular application of an acronym doesn't speak ill of their skills in a particular field.  Just means they don't care about how it relates to you.


It's all of the above and more.

But nobody in that courtroom should not be at least aware of video games enough they don't need explaination.  I'd go so far to insist the judge and all twelve jury members be active modern gamers so they understand in game purchases, dlc, etc from experience before deciding the financial fate of an entire branch of the industry, but that might be too big an ask.


Having to have video games explained by the lawyer in 2021 in a trial is analogous to some lawyer in the 1800's having to explain what a horse is to a bunch of people who rode to the courthouse.
 
2021-05-11 7:21:37 PM  

leeksfromchichis: freakdiablo: leeksfromchichis: freakdiablo: leeksfromchichis: It's 2021.  Anyone who needs FPS explained is too ignorant for legal jobs or jury duty.

Meh.  Gaming terminology generally isn't really a requirement to handle corporate lawsuits, not any more than sport statistics or what the latest big name TikTok-er posted last night.

FPS isn't gaming terminology so much as a universal initialism that spans generations and languages.   If you don't know, you don't know enough to be allowed to serve in this trial even though corporate law is allegedly the important part.  It's like not knowing why we don't put dynamite in our butts.  not the most important knowledge, but someone lacking is dangerously below average.

What does fps stand for?  Frames per second? Feet per second?  Just because someone doesn't know your particular application of an acronym doesn't speak ill of their skills in a particular field.  Just means they don't care about how it relates to you.

It's all of the above and more.

But nobody in that courtroom should not be at least aware of video games enough they don't need explaination.  I'd go so far to insist the judge and all twelve jury members be active modern gamers so they understand in game purchases, dlc, etc from experience before deciding the financial fate of an entire branch of the industry, but that might be too big an ask.


Having to have video games explained by the lawyer in 2021 in a trial is analogous to some lawyer in the 1800's having to explain what a horse is to a bunch of people who rode to the courthouse.



FFS people, this is not a jury trial.

And it's a safe bet that every lawyer in the room, if he or she didn't grasp the relevant concepts before taking the case, certainly does by now. (I would also expect that virtually all of them have personally played games on their phones.)

Same goes for the judge who has been on this case for about a year IIRC and litigated in SF before becoming a judge and has presided over tech trials including previous ones involving Apple. And has raised kids in the 21st century.

They aren't asking questions about games because they are cavepeople who don't understand how anything works, they're asking them to lay the foundation for other questions/arguments and make sure all the relevant shiat (from the mouths of appropriate witnesses) is in the record.

/and you never know whether you might get an appeals judge who lives in a cave...
 
Displayed 35 of 35 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking




On Twitter


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.